User Profile: tmarends


Member Since: September 03, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [1] April 14, 2015 at 2:58pm

    I don’t know about anyone else… but what I learned as part of customer service is you make every attempt to provide the services you offer to anyone who wants them, as long as it is 1) legal, and 2) available.

  • [-4] April 13, 2015 at 3:33pm

    Most people, and that includes LGBT people, just go to what is the most convenient to their location. Why go 10 miles out of your way when you have a florist down the street?

    In this case, this was a business which provided a place to host weddings. Unlike a church, which also plays host to weddings, businesses CANNOT discriminate. If they don’t want to serve ALL the public who seeks their business, then WHY are they in business? You say they have the RIGHT of conscience to refuse to participate… and you are right… the INDIVIDUAL has that right. The BUSINESS does not. Their wedding venue must host any legal wedding in their state. Churches, on the other hand, can set parameters to their venue (like one party must be a member of the church, or the couple must go through per-marital counseling with the church first).

    Responses (4) +
  • [3] April 4, 2015 at 10:17pm

    What don’t you people understand?? This baker did NOT refuse to sell them a cake… she refused the WORDS he wanted on the cake. If she makes wedding cakes with pastillage flowers on it, then who cares where it is eaten? It should be sold to anyone who wants it.

  • [-5] April 3, 2015 at 6:42pm

    I think it’s one thing to print words, or create images one finds offensive, and creating a basic (although nicely decorated) cake. Please refuse to print “I hate X” on any cake… but don’t refuse the cake itself without the words.

    Also, where is the line at a “participant” in a wedding? Is the baker really “participating” by baking and decorating a cake, maybe delivering it to the venue and setting it up, and then leaving?? I can see the point of a photographer or caterer who will be there through the entire event? But someone, like a baker or florist, who delivers their goods and leaves before the event (wedding) happens?? To me, that is NOT participating in the event.

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] April 2, 2015 at 1:20pm

    As a gay man I have no problem with this. Let a baker only provide “wedding services” for certain churches and nobody else. Perfectly legal. I do, however, see two issues:

    1) The baker looses all other wedding services. People who do not marry in those churches, cannot get cakes from them, and they will lose all profits from people who would otherwise go to them for their services (like an atheist couple having a wedding in their back yard).

    2) IF one of the churches the baker has contracted with DOES host a “gay” marriage, the baker is on the hook to provide the cake, as they have a contract with the church to provide those services. No getting out of it, you’ve already signed a contract with that church.

    Responses (2) +
  • [5] April 1, 2015 at 8:24pm

    How is selling someone something “participating” in the event it is being used for? Is the SuperMarket participating in my Wednesday night poker game because I bought soda, beer, and chips from them?

  • March 31, 2015 at 5:24pm

    The last time I checked a woman CAN purchase men’s clothing… and men CAN purchase women’s lingerie. It’s not discriminatory to NOT carry items for sale. You cannot FORCE someone to sell something they do not normally carry… but you CANNOT refuse to sell anything you normally do to anyone who wishes to purchase.

  • [1] March 31, 2015 at 5:18pm

    The courts have regularly stated the offensive material CAN be excluded.

    A printer CAN refuse printing words that call for someone’s death
    A printer CANNOT refuse a flyer for a book club at the LGBT center

    A baker CAN refuse to put 2 grooms atop a wedding cake
    A baker CANNOT refuse to sell a wedding cake (without 2 grooms atop it) to a gay couple.

  • March 31, 2015 at 4:51pm

    Courts have decided, again and again, that offensive images or words CAN be omitted from any work, like a cake, but the cake itself MUST be sold to one who wishes it. IF the bakery doesn’t want to put 2 grooms on top of the cake, that IS permitted… but they are still required to make the cake. What the baker, or photographer, can choose to do or not to do, as individuals, is DIFFERENT than what the bakery or photography studio is required to provide… the same for ALL who seek their public services. The problem occurs when the business and the individual are the same. In those cases, the business rules apply. That’s the price of running a business in the public square. Don’t like it? You can always hire someone to do the work you personally refuse to do.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-1] March 31, 2015 at 4:27pm

    Blest — so you think a business has the right to refuse service to a black, Asian, or Jewish person, just for being who they are?

  • [3] March 27, 2015 at 6:11pm

    The difference is you refused to do something for everyone across the board. Nobody got those cake designs. But if you normally design a 3-tier wedding cake with a floral design, then you should be prepared to sell it to anyone who wants one, regardless of where they intend to use it.

  • [17] March 27, 2015 at 1:14pm

    It is now legal in Indiana for a Muslim shop owner to refuse to serve a woman whose head is not covered, and if she is not accompanied by a male relative…. ANY Muslim shop owner… be it 7-11 or the gas station or anything.

    Responses (6) +
  • [30] March 27, 2015 at 1:10pm

    There’s a difference between demanding something the shop does not provide — like you bacon example in a Muslim store — and being turned away for something the shop does provide — a cake.

    Responses (1) +
  • [8] March 27, 2015 at 1:01pm

    So a Muslim owner of the 7-11 does not have to sell anything to a woman who is not accompanied by a male relative, nor has her head covered… because to do otherwise would be against his religious beliefs… in a 7-11.

    Responses (4) +
  • [2] March 26, 2015 at 6:37pm

    So the state of Indiana can no longer prosecute a Muslim for murder when they commit an “honor” killing, as they are just practicing their faith.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] March 19, 2015 at 12:20pm

    You know nothing about biology, do you? It’s not “penis + vagina = child”… it’s “semen + egg = child”

    Responses (1) +
  • March 19, 2015 at 12:10pm

    First, she wasn’t raised in a lesbian home… she was raised in a broken home… the divorce came first in her life. As a young child THAT is what affected her, and why she wanted her father, even her bad father, back in her life. Parents need to put their children first. Now maybe her mother did, because the dad “wasn’t a great guy”… but the relationship between father and daughter had already existed… you can’t undo that. It sounds, to me, that her mother was too caught up in herself than her child.

    After I divorced I made sure daddy/daughter time was just that. If I was dating someone, they stayed out of the time I had with my daughter. I was willing to let one into that time, but knowing that my daughter came first. None of them could handle that… they wanted any time about them, including time where my daughter was involved… sorry… not going to happen. I might still be single, but my relationship with my 20something daughter is great. NOW I can focus on a romantic relationship. When my daughter was growing up, my time was devoted to her. Too many people are not willing to sacrifice their own happiness for the sake of their children… THAT is where the problem is. And it honestly doesn’t matter if the person is gay or straight. I see it happen with both.

    However I still believe a gay couple can raise children successfully… especially by having people of both genders in the child(ren)s life.

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] February 26, 2015 at 12:26pm

    I don’t understand how the Spirit would be insulted by someone asking an honest question of someone more knowledgeable on the subject. Sounds like the same reasoning Muslims give when they go off when someone “insults” Mohammad… which is, of course, no reason at all.

  • [1] February 20, 2015 at 12:07am

    She wasn’t “targeted”… they were long time customers, who regularly bought flowers in her shop. They went to buy flowers in their regular flower shop for a special occasion and were turned away because of what the special occasion was.

  • [6] February 9, 2015 at 2:01pm

    I see Alabama is still following their long and proud tradition… seeing how they didn’t even bother to repeal their anti-miscegenation laws until 2000, when the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in 1967.

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go
Restoring Love